PDA

View Full Version : APP - Scary without the hype



Taichiliberal
12-15-2009, 07:10 PM
Yep, Al Gore got his facts wrong on one point during an address in Copenhagen (neocons will SWEAR it was on purpose). But what's interesting to me is that the author who called him on it points out that his findings are just as dramatic without the exaggeration.

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/al-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen/19281919?icid=main*htmlws-main-n*dl1*link3*http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sphere.com%2Fworld%2F article%2Fal-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen%2F19281919%0D%0A

Minister of Truth
12-15-2009, 11:45 PM
Scary? Should I scream?

Damocles
12-16-2009, 08:34 AM
Yes. You should. Because we are all going to die. Every one of us. So speaketh the Goreacle.

tinfoil
12-16-2009, 10:24 AM
Yep, Al Gore got his facts wrong on one point during an address in Copenhagen (neocons will SWEAR it was on purpose). But what's interesting to me is that the author who called him on it points out that his findings are just as dramatic without the exaggeration.

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/al-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen/19281919?icid=main*htmlws-main-n*dl1*link3*http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sphere.com%2Fworld%2F article%2Fal-gore-fudges-numbers-at-climate-change-summit-in-copenhagen%2F19281919%0D%0A

he didn't just get it wrong... he fucking lied.
He represented the info as recent when in fact it was quite old.

Taichiliberal
12-16-2009, 05:18 PM
Scary? Should I scream?

Nah, just keep toodling along as always...willfully oblivious to the real world.

Taichiliberal
12-16-2009, 05:26 PM
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Yep, Al Gore got his facts wrong on one point during an address in Copenhagen (neocons will SWEAR it was on purpose). But what's interesting to me is that the author who called him on it points out that his findings are just as dramatic without the exaggeration.

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/...19281919%0D%0A


he didn't just get it wrong... he fucking lied.
He represented the info as recent when in fact it was quite old.

Interesting....you automatically assumed the guy purposely lied, yet you are in complete denial when your same thought process is applied to the last 8 years regarding this subject.

That being said, I assume you're in denial or you have contrary information about the correct information that Gore got wrong?

Taichiliberal
12-16-2009, 05:27 PM
Yes. You should. Because we are all going to die. Every one of us. So speaketh the Goreacle.

You shouldn't encourage him....it wastes a lot of space.

apple0154
12-16-2009, 05:34 PM
My understanding is the north was quite warm at one time. They have found dinosaur bones in Alberta, Canada and this week Edmonton was -45 C! Maybe the earth is going to be one big greenhouse.

How big is Antarctica? Would the available land, if defrosted, compensate for the present land that will be flooded?

Sorry for asking but it's barely +5 F here today. :-(

DamnYankee
12-16-2009, 06:24 PM
There was an interesting show on History last night about the Sahara Desert and how it changes every 10,000 years, with a geologic record of these changes going back millions of years. The cycle coincides exactly with the wobble of the Earth on its axis. 10,000 year cycles are what I remember from college as ice age cycles as well.

tinfoil
12-16-2009, 06:26 PM
Interesting....you automatically assumed the guy purposely lied, yet you are in complete denial when your same thought process is applied to the last 8 years regarding this subject.

That being said, I assume you're in denial or you have contrary information about the correct information that Gore got wrong?

it's obvious he lied. The scientist in question said their conversation was several years ago, but Al repeatedly says it's fresh.

And Yes, I listened to the interview with the scientist.
He doesn't say what Gore says, but the interviewer says it in prefacing the interview. The scientist does not correct the interviewer. So, I can see why gore would latch onto this info, but he still lied about it being fresh science.

tinfoil
12-16-2009, 06:41 PM
There was an interesting show on History last night about the Sahara Desert and how it changes every 10,000 years, with a geologic record of these changes going back millions of years. The cycle coincides exactly with the wobble of the Earth on its axis. 10,000 year cycles are what I remember from college as ice age cycles as well.

As you recall from several years ago, the argument has always been that the warming right now is unprecedented. The evidence was reconstructed temps deduced from treering proxies. Or so we thought. But it turns out if the scientists used the same method (calculated by treering width/density) on the recent growth of trees, the temp reading they get doesn't match the high temp reading of actual temps that we have actual data for. This is the problem they had to solve. All they had to do was misrepresent the graph. And as we see now, it doesn't matter to people like ching chang here one little bit. They are perfectly happy to call it science if it meets their goals.

Even with the knowledge of the deception, warmers remain faithful.

The facts about the adjustments are not in dispute. They mated real temps onto estimated temps derived by theories about temps and tree ring size.

One part of the temp graph has error margins, the other does not. We know the real temps. The recent temps should have beeen calculated using the treering method. Hoe else can we know how to determine the temps from treering data? Cart before the horse? WTF?

Clearly, the actual temps not matching the temps derived by treering method SHOULD have called the treering method into question.

Not our heros!. Just use the real temps when the treerings stop making their case


It's obvious to me that the posters here who still defend this science, really don't understand it.

DamnYankee
12-16-2009, 06:50 PM
I recall having a debate over a similar issue, not tree rings but actual weather station data. My point was that many of these sites have become urbanized over time, and in fact some are moved several miles. Urbanization is an obvious effect on temperatures at that discreet location. Intuition and facts back this up. My opponent stated that the "scientists" know all this so use "adjustment factors" to counter the urbanization effects. That's bullshit, of course, because these "scientists" don't know the details of what happened at or around a site over 110 years of data, and if they did could play with the adjustment constants to get any end result that they wanted.

Taichiliberal
12-16-2009, 10:15 PM
My understanding is the north was quite warm at one time. They have found dinosaur bones in Alberta, Canada and this week Edmonton was -45 C! Maybe the earth is going to be one big greenhouse.

How big is Antarctica? Would the available land, if defrosted, compensate for the present land that will be flooded?

Sorry for asking but it's barely +5 F here today. :-(

See, the bottom line is that no one is denying natural climate change....it's the drastic urbanization, deforestation along with increasing levels of atmospheric pollution that has affected this natural change...and it's not for the better.

We can adapt as a species...but competing against each other for the illusion of economic superiority is not going to bode well for anyone.

Taichiliberal
12-16-2009, 10:35 PM
it's obvious he lied. The scientist in question said their conversation was several years ago, but Al repeatedly says it's fresh.

Repeating yourself ad nauseum won't make an allegation magically come true. However, I will concede that unless Al makes a public statement that he screwed up, the repetitive "liar" bullhorn by the neocons will become more plausible.

And Yes, I listened to the interview with the scientist.
He doesn't say what Gore says, but the interviewer says it in prefacing the interview. The scientist does not correct the interviewer. So, I can see why gore would latch onto this info, but he still lied about it being fresh science.

Please provide a link to that interview, if possible. What you are saying here that based on the interviewer, you cand see how Gore might have gotten the wrong idea...yet you INSIST he's still a liar. Weird, you're a liar because you believe in the misleading info from the source. Seems you've just got it in for Gore.

Taichiliberal
12-16-2009, 10:42 PM
As you recall from several years ago, the argument has always been that the warming right now is unprecedented. The evidence was reconstructed temps deduced from treering proxies. Or so we thought. But it turns out if the scientists used the same method (calculated by treering width/density) on the recent growth of trees, the temp reading they get doesn't match the high temp reading of actual temps that we have actual data for. This is the problem they had to solve. All they had to do was misrepresent the graph. And as we see now, it doesn't matter to people like ching chang here one little bit. They are perfectly happy to call it science if it meets their goals.

Even with the knowledge of the deception, warmers remain faithful.

The facts about the adjustments are not in dispute. They mated real temps onto estimated temps derived by theories about temps and tree ring size.

One part of the temp graph has error margins, the other does not. We know the real temps. The recent temps should have beeen calculated using the treering method. Hoe else can we know how to determine the temps from treering data? Cart before the horse? WTF?

Clearly, the actual temps not matching the temps derived by treering method SHOULD have called the treering method into question.

Not our heros!. Just use the real temps when the treerings stop making their case


It's obvious to me that the posters here who still defend this science, really don't understand it.


You keep trying to look at trends that took thousands of years to normally occur while leaving out the FACTS that the previously recorded trends were done WITHOUT global increase of the last 200 years in industrial air pollution, global deforestation and urbanization of land and water that is crucial in the CO2/oxygen exchange.

See, the bottom line is that no one is denying natural climate change....
We can adapt as a species...but denial of what man has added to the mix in the last 200 years while competing against each other for the illusion of economic superiority is not going to bode well for anyone.

FUCK THE POLICE
12-17-2009, 04:12 AM
My understanding is the north was quite warm at one time. They have found dinosaur bones in Alberta, Canada and this week Edmonton was -45 C! Maybe the earth is going to be one big greenhouse.

How big is Antarctica? Would the available land, if defrosted, compensate for the present land that will be flooded?

Sorry for asking but it's barely +5 F here today. :-(

You'd need a lot of warming to literally melt all of antarctica, and it would take millions of years for that plate to rise all the way back to the surface, because it's been crushed under ice for so long. Antarctica is rather small anyway.

FUCK THE POLICE
12-17-2009, 04:14 AM
This would be the actual size of antarctica right after an ice melt:

http://antarcticsun.usap.gov/antarcticsun/science/images/change_rocksurface.jpg

apple0154
12-17-2009, 06:55 AM
You'd need a lot of warming to literally melt all of antarctica, and it would take millions of years for that plate to rise all the way back to the surface, because it's been crushed under ice for so long. Antarctica is rather small anyway.

I guess we can scrap that idea. :(

NOVA
12-17-2009, 07:21 AM
Please provide a link to that interview, if possible. What you are saying here that based on the interviewer, you cand see how Gore might have gotten the wrong idea...yet you INSIST he's still a liar. Weird, you're a liar because you believe in the misleading info from the source. Seems you've just got it in for Gore.

Fuckin' amazing how you can bend over backwards making excuses for Gore with this statement but could not begin to apply the same logic to Bush and Iraqi WMD even after hearing the infamous Dem quotes saying the same thing over about 7 years, with NIE confirmation, along with 15+ unanimous UN resolutions all agreeing....but then thats another thread....:pke:

What a hack you are...

Personally, I don't think Gore consciously lied..but he'll grab at anything and everything he can .....hes just in this hoax so deep he can't get out without looking like the fool and hypocrite we all know he is.....

DamnYankee
12-17-2009, 07:34 AM
This would be the actual size of antarctica right after an ice melt:


Awesome development potential: ski areas, spas, amusement parks for the kiddies!

Damocles
12-17-2009, 09:33 AM
I recall having a debate over a similar issue, not tree rings but actual weather station data. My point was that many of these sites have become urbanized over time, and in fact some are moved several miles. Urbanization is an obvious effect on temperatures at that discreet location. Intuition and facts back this up. My opponent stated that the "scientists" know all this so use "adjustment factors" to counter the urbanization effects. That's bullshit, of course, because these "scientists" don't know the details of what happened at or around a site over 110 years of data, and if they did could play with the adjustment constants to get any end result that they wanted.
They use "adjustment factors", that is true. However they will not and have not shown their work on the "adjustment factors", they use a software that automatically adjusts but they don't even give the criteria they use for the adjustment let alone let people look at the software (allowing access to data and factors for adjustment would be normal for any real scientific study of this type, but not here, nobody can see what they do...) to find problems with the "adjustments"...

tinfoil
12-17-2009, 10:23 AM
Please provide a link to that interview, if possible. What you are saying here that based on the interviewer, you cand see how Gore might have gotten the wrong idea...yet you INSIST he's still a liar. Weird, you're a liar because you believe in the misleading info from the source. Seems you've just got it in for Gore.
I explained very clearly why he's a liar. He said the info was FRESH! FRESH SCIENCE!! It was not. That's the lie.

Google the scientist's name if you want to find the interview.

Taichiliberal
12-17-2009, 08:36 PM
Fuckin' amazing how you can bend over backwards making excuses for Gore with this statement but could not begin to apply the same logic to Bush and Iraqi WMD even after hearing the infamous Dem quotes saying the same thing over about 7 years, with NIE confirmation, along with 15+ unanimous UN resolutions all agreeing....but then thats another thread....:pke:

What's "fucking amazing" is how you either ignore what you don't like or don't comprehend what you read. Here's what else I said, ".... However, I will concede that unless Al makes a public statement that he screwed up, the repetitive "liar" bullhorn by the neocons will become more plausible."

What's also "fucking amazing" is how incredibly proud you are of your willful ignorance and insipid stubborness. How many times do I have to dumb it down for you? The UN and Dem quotes all led up to the continuation of the no fly zones, economic sanctions, surveillence, strategic bombings AND WMD INSPECTORS ON SITE. The Shrub and company VIOLATED the UN rules and the agreement with Congress....the UN went ON RECORD stating so. The NIE report STATED THAT IT'S SOURCE MATERIAL WAS QUESTIONABLE AT BEST. A matter of fact, a matter of history.....grow up and deal with it.

What a hack you are... Oh boy, our intellectually impotent willfully ignorant neocon bullhorn is on again with the false bravado! This signifys he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about beyond the Rove inspired mantras he's been fed. Cognitive reasoning is NOT a neocon's strong point.

Personally, I don't think Gore consciously lied ..but he'll grab at anything and everything he can .....hes just in this hoax so deep he can't get out without looking like the fool and hypocrite we all know he is.....

So Gore didn't lie because he's already lying? God, you don't even realize how fucking stupid you sound, do ya bunky? :palm:

Taichiliberal
12-17-2009, 08:41 PM
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Please provide a link to that interview, if possible. What you are saying here that based on the interviewer, you cand see how Gore might have gotten the wrong idea...yet you INSIST he's still a liar. Weird, you're a liar because you believe in the misleading info from the source. Seems you've just got it in for Gore.


I explained very clearly why he's a liar. He said the info was FRESH! FRESH SCIENCE!! It was not. That's the lie.

Repeating yourself won't make your beliefs come true, nor will it erase EVERYTHING I've said in the previous response.

Google the scientist's name if you want to find the interview.

Translation: you don't have the information....which makes YOU a suspected liar. YOU made the statment, the burden of proof is on YOU. Put up or blow it out your ass. Or say something stupid followed by the faux condescending laugh.

tinfoil
12-17-2009, 09:11 PM
Translation: you don't have the information....which makes YOU a suspected liar. YOU made the statment, the burden of proof is on YOU. Put up or blow it out your ass. Or say something stupid followed by the faux condescending laugh.

LOL whatever ching chong
I'm not wasting my time digging it up. If you want to find it it a google search away.

Oh what the hell

here's the link I listened to a couple days ago.
http://beyondzeroemissions.org/media/radio/dr-wieslaw-maslowski-predicted-2013-ice-free-summer-arctic-five-years-ago-now-he-says-ma
here's a link to the a BBC article with him
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm

He does make the claim.

I wonder why he doesn't stand behind it?

Something about rats and a sinking ship, maybe

Taichiliberal
12-17-2009, 11:48 PM
LOL whatever ching chong :palm: Not only did this idiot do EXACTLY like I said he would, but he tops it off with a racial dig. How revealing!I'm not wasting my time digging it up. If you want to find it it a google search away.

Oh what the hell

And now the buffoon tries to puff himself up with with this pretense of a magnanimous gesture...which is just a fair and mannerly action during a debate...meeting a burden of proof.

here's the link I listened to a couple days ago.
http://beyondzeroemissions.org/media/radio/dr-wieslaw-maslowski-predicted-2013-ice-free-summer-arctic-five-years-ago-now-he-says-ma
here's a link to the a BBC article with him
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7139797.stm

He does make the claim.

I wonder why he doesn't stand behind it?

Something about rats and a sinking ship, maybe

:palm: First, here's the link to the transcript

http://beyondzeroemissions.org/media/radio/dr-wieslaw-maslowski-predicted-2013-ice-free-summer-arctic-five-years-ago-now-he-says-ma

There is NOTHING "leading" by the interviewer, since he states "correct me if I'm wrong" during his questions. When you look at this and what Maslowski said in my previous link, the ONE thing you can harp on is that Gore states the information is "fresh". That was Mslowki's point, as his interview didn't have him screaming Gore's a liar....he just said Gore got it ass backwards.

Like I said before, if Gore is questioned on this and he doesn't say, "yeah, I totally screwed up my facts on that one", then neocons will hoot and holler that he's a liar and all his material is lies, etc., etc. I'll wait and see, because Gore is no dummy and will probably take the heat for an honest mistake.

So why don't you write a letter to Limbaugh or Hannity or Crowley or Beck to make this a BIG issue....hound Gore for the truth. Then whatever the answer is you can just repeat your beliefs anyway.

DamnYankee
12-18-2009, 07:14 AM
Big surprise, Libby worshiping at Algore's altar. Environmentalism is the Left's religion. :palm:

tinfoil
12-19-2009, 10:16 AM
:palm: First, here's the link to the transcript

http://beyondzeroemissions.org/media/radio/dr-wieslaw-maslowski-predicted-2013-ice-free-summer-arctic-five-years-ago-now-he-says-ma

There is NOTHING "leading" by the interviewer, since he states "correct me if I'm wrong" during his questions. When you look at this and what Maslowski said in my previous link, the ONE thing you can harp on is that Gore states the information is "fresh". That was Mslowki's point, as his interview didn't have him screaming Gore's a liar....he just said Gore got it ass backwards.

Like I said before, if Gore is questioned on this and he doesn't say, "yeah, I totally screwed up my facts on that one", then neocons will hoot and holler that he's a liar and all his material is lies, etc., etc. I'll wait and see, because Gore is no dummy and will probably take the heat for an honest mistake.

So why don't you write a letter to Limbaugh or Hannity or Crowley or Beck to make this a BIG issue....hound Gore for the truth. Then whatever the answer is you can just repeat your beliefs anyway.

I don't listen to or watch either of those folks.
Gore lies

tinfoil
12-19-2009, 05:24 PM
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9004

See what the american media is ignoring

NOVA
12-19-2009, 05:59 PM
http://www.infowars.com/gore-peddles-lies-and-spin-to-defend-bankrupt-climate-change-agenda/
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9004
http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/11/catastrophe-denied-video-from-my-climate-lecture.html?gclid=CLn1nf7a454CFRh15QodME8igw


Its settled....the consensus is in....its almost unanimous....educated people agree....only the hackers continue to worship at the "warmers" altar.....:good4u:

cancel2 2022
12-19-2009, 07:04 PM
There was an interesting show on History last night about the Sahara Desert and how it changes every 10,000 years, with a geologic record of these changes going back millions of years. The cycle coincides exactly with the wobble of the Earth on its axis. 10,000 year cycles are what I remember from college as ice age cycles as well.

If you are referring to the precession of the equinoxes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession_%28astronomy%29), that is a 26,000 year cycle.

Taichiliberal
12-19-2009, 08:39 PM
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
First, here's the link to the transcript

http://beyondzeroemissions.org/media...now-he-says-ma

There is NOTHING "leading" by the interviewer, since he states "correct me if I'm wrong" during his questions. When you look at this and what Maslowski said in my previous link, the ONE thing you can harp on is that Gore states the information is "fresh". That was Mslowki's point, as his interview didn't have him screaming Gore's a liar....he just said Gore got it ass backwards.

Like I said before, if Gore is questioned on this and he doesn't say, "yeah, I totally screwed up my facts on that one", then neocons will hoot and holler that he's a liar and all his material is lies, etc., etc. I'll wait and see, because Gore is no dummy and will probably take the heat for an honest mistake.

So why don't you write a letter to Limbaugh or Hannity or Crowley or Beck to make this a BIG issue....hound Gore for the truth. Then whatever the answer is you can just repeat your beliefs anyway.


I don't listen to or watch either of those folks. Then you must be psychic, because you sure as hell channel their blatherings verbatim!
Gore lies

Yeah, you said that already.....proving it beyond your worthless opinion is something else entirely. Also, you cannot disprove what Maslowski corrects. Once again, you prove yourself to be nothing but a chuckling dishonest neocon clown.

Taichiliberal
12-19-2009, 08:47 PM
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9004

See what the american media is ignoring

This was covered on the local network stations, you buffoon. And of course, information STOLEN and routed through Russia by a "secret hacker" is suddenly "corroborated" by certain Russian officials, who have gone on record as being obstinate towards any international consensus to reduce air pollution via industrial modification.

Nothing suspicious about that. :rolleyes:

Taichiliberal
12-19-2009, 08:52 PM
http://www.infowars.com/gore-peddles-lies-and-spin-to-defend-bankrupt-climate-change-agenda/
http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=9004
http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/11/catastrophe-denied-video-from-my-climate-lecture.html?gclid=CLn1nf7a454CFRh15QodME8igw


Its settled....the consensus is in....its almost unanimous....educated people agree....only the hackers continue to worship at the "warmers" altar.....:good4u:

Right, because deforestation, urbanization and industrial pollution on an escalating scale for 200 years that DESTROYS the very system that exchanges oxygen for CO2 has NO effect on the natural cycles of the earth, right bunky? :palm:

And isn't it interesting how YOU suddenly kiss the ass of RUSSIAN HACKERS when they tell you what you want to here. Or did you forget how this mess got started?

And again, what are you defending? How is making the air we breath better so detrimental to the world? Don't give me that economic bullshit, because last year should have wised you up to the real culprit in that area.

DamnYankee
12-19-2009, 10:38 PM
If you are referring to the precession of the equinoxes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_precession_%28astronomy%29), that is a 26,000 year cycle.

Whatever. The point being that its not folks breathing that makes the climate change.

Damocles
12-20-2009, 04:55 PM
Even the dude on the radio, the professor who hosts "Stump the Professor", had a show about this. Previously a supporter, he now talks about how they created the hockey-stick graph so that any data entered still creates the same result from 1902 on, how the data was manipulated....

It's freaky how each new revelation just makes it worse. Then hearing Tony Blair talking about how it is important to do it "even if it is false" just makes me laugh.